Medications for Unhealthy Alcohol Use

The prevalence of unidentified or untreated unhealthy alcohol use remains high. With the advent of pharmacotherapy and models of counseling appropriate for use in primary care settings as well as in specialty care, clinicians have new tools to manage the range of alcohol problems across the spectrum of health care settings. By extending treatment to primary care, many people who do not currently receive specialty care may have increased access to treatment. In addition, primary care providers, by virtue of their ongoing relationship with patients, may be able to provide continuing treatment over time. Extending the spectrum of care to hazardous drinkers who may not be alcohol dependent could result in earlier intervention and reduce the consequences of excessive drinking.


U
nhealthy alcohol use, which includes the spectrum of drink ing behaviors and consequences ranging from risky use to problem drinking, along with alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence (Saitz 2005), has been linked to a multitude of health and social problems.Unhealthy alcohol use accounts for an estimated 85,000 deaths at an economic cost of $185 billion annually in the United States (Harwood 2000).Beyond this, numerous medical problems, such as liver disease, neurologic problems, and malignancies, as well as behavioral dysfunction result ing in employment and legal problems are directly attributable to alcohol.
Research has demonstrated that a variety of treatment approaches can help individuals with unhealthy alcohol use decrease their alcohol intake and thus avoid the many consequences described above.Counseling interven tions have been designed to address the full spectrum of unhealthy alcohol use from brief interventions for risky use to more complex and rigorous counseling strategies for individuals with alcohol dependence.In addition, beginning with disulfiram in the late 1940s and more recently with nal trexone and acamprosate along with newer medications "in the pipeline," pharmacotherapy has been demon strated to be a useful adjunct to behavioral therapies for many people with unhealthy alcohol use, particu larly those with alcohol dependence.
The spectrum of unhealthy alcohol use can be addressed in a variety of health care settings, including primary care, specialty practice, and alcohol treatment programs.Although com plex behavioral strategies have been developed primarily for specialty settings and treatment programs where they can be effectively delivered, screening and brief intervention counseling has been developed for use in primary care settings, with a focus on treatment referral when necessary.Medication use in these nonspecialized settings and in a spectrum of patients including nondependent individuals is a recent phenomenon.
Research is needed to address the optimal use of medication therapy for the treatment of alcohol use disorders and for treating the broader spectrum of unhealthy alcohol use, from non dependent risky drinking to alcohol dependence.This is especially true given the major scientific advances in pharmacotherapy that have been made over the past 60 years.To improve access to effective medication therapy, research also should explore the use of these medications in a range of health care settings.To optimize medication treatment outcomes, practitioners need to assess both the appropriate STEPHANIE S. O'MALLEY, PH.D., is professor of psychiatry; and PATRICK G. O'CONNOR, M.D., M.P.H., is professor of internal medicine, both at the Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.level of counseling (from minimal to more intensive) and the appropriate methods to enhance medication adherence for individual patients.The development of medications to address the spectrum of unhealthy alcohol use across the broad range of health care settings has the potential to maximize benefits for future patients.
After reviewing the medications currently approved for alcohol depen dence and new medications being investigated, this article will outline ways to optimize treatment outcomes through patient-treatment matching and increased treatment adherence and review potential uses of medications for nondependent hazardous drinkers, including the use of medications in primary care settings.

Medications for Alcohol Dependence
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved four medications for the treatment of alcohol depen dence: disulfiram (Antabuse ® ), oral naltrexone, extendedrelease naltrexone (Vivitrol ® ), and acamprosate (Campral ® ).Topiramate, a medication used to treat epilepsy and migraine, has demonstrated evidence in two clinical trials of alcohol dependence, and a number of other promising medications are being studied.For detailed infor mation about mechanisms, risks, and benefits of approved medications and those on the horizon, please see KrishnanSarin (2008).(For specific reviews: disulfiram [Malcom et al. 2008], oral naltrexone [Pettinati et al. 2006], injectable naltrexone [Swainston Harrison et al. 2006], acamprosate [Scott et al. 2005;Mason and Crean 2007], topiramate [Johnson and AitDaoud 2010] and the prod uct information for each medication).The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism's (NIAAA's) Clinician's Guide provides practical information about prescribing medi cations for alcohol dependence (NIAAA 2007) and covers a range of consider ations (e.g., concurrent counseling, length of treatment, mechanisms, contraindications, precautions, adverse events, drug interactions, and usual adult dosage).
Disulfiram, the first drug approved for the treatment of alcohol dependence, and still one of the most commonly used agents, produces an aversive interaction with alcohol by interfering with the metabolism of alcohol.During alcohol metabolism, alcohol is con verted to acetaldehyde, which then is broken down by the enzyme aldehyde dehydrogenease.Disulfiram inhibits this later step, leading to a build up of acetalydehyde and results in aversive effects such as nausea, vomiting, pal pitations, and headache.Ordinarily, the negative consequences of alcohol consumption (e.g., health problems) are delayed and are uncertain (e.g., your significant other may or may not become angry with you; the police may not apprehend you for drunk driving).The knowledge of the poten tial disulfiram alcohol interaction, however, can make the consequences of drinking certain and immediate and thereby support a person's moti vation to avoid drinking, and the actual reaction may limit the amount consumed if abstinence is violated.Medication compliance can be a problem, however, and disulfiram is most effective when provided with supervised administration by a signif icant other or health care provider (Krampe and Ehrenreich 2010).
Naltrexone is an opiate antagonist that primarily blocks µreceptors with more variable occupancy of δreceptors at the standard dose of 50 mg daily (Weerts et al. 2008).In laboratory studies, naltrexone has been shown to reduce the number of drinks con sumed (Anton et al. 2004;Krishnan Sarin et al. 2007;O'Malley et al. 2002).In clinical trials, naltrexone reduced the percentage of heavy drinking days (Pettinati et al. 2006).Recent metaanalyses have indicated that oral naltrexone has modest effi cacy over 3 months on preventing relapse to heavy drinking, return to any drinking, and medication discon tinuation (Srisurapanont et al. 2005).The standard dose is 50 mg daily, but a multisite study demonstrated that 100 mg daily also was effective when combined with medical management (Anton et al. 2006).
Extendedrelease naltrexone, a formulation that only requires a monthly injection, holds the potential to minimize problems with medication adherence.In a 6month trial, 64 percent of participants received all 6 months of doubleblind medication, translating into daily coverage for the entire treatment period (Garbutt et al. 2005).Naltrexone was significantly more effective in reducing the rate of heavy drinking than placebo, an effect most pronounced in those who had achieved abstinence prior to receiving the first injection.In the subset of those who were abstinent for at least 4 days prior to random assignment, extendedrelease naltrexone also significantly improved continuous abstinence rates (O'Malley et al. 2007).Specifically, 32 percent of those receiving extendedrelease naltrexone (380 mg) remained abstinent over 6 months compared with 11 percent of those receiving placebo.
The primary adverse effects of nal trexone, whether oral or injectable, are nausea followed by headache and dizziness.Patients with significant liver disease are not candidates for naltrexone nor are patients who require opiate medications for pain control.Acute pain control requires alternatives to opioids.To avoid precipitating an opioidwithdrawal syndrome, patients should be free of opioids for 7 to 10 days before beginning naltrexone.If extendedrelease naltrexone is admin istered subcutaneously rather than as an intramuscular gluteal injection, the likelihood of severe injectionsite reactions may increase (http://www.vivitrol.com/pdf_docs/prescribing_info.pdf ).
Acamprosate, available in oral delayedrelease tablets (Campral ® ), was approved for use in the treatment of alcoholism in the United States in 2004, following extensive use in many other countries.Acamprosate is believed to normalize the balance between excitatory and inhibitory pathways altered by chronic alcohol consumption (Littleton and Zieglgansberger 2003), although the actual mechanism of action is uncer tain.Using combined data from three European studies that were the basis of the approval of acamprosate in the United States, Kranzler and Gage (2008) found that acamprosate improved rates of continuous abstinence, percent days abstinent, and time to first drink.Two studies conducted in the United States did not find overall efficacy for acamprosate (Anton et al. 2006;Mason et al. 2006); however, the methods of these studies differed in substantial ways from the European studies.Notably, 90 percent of patients in the European acamprosate clinical trials received inpatient detoxification, compared with only 2.3 percent and 7.7 percent of those in U.S. trials (Mason and Crean 2007).
One of the strengths of acamprosate is its sideeffect profile; the most common side effects are gastrointestinal in nature.Acamprosate can be used in patients with moderate liver disease but is contraindicated in patients with severe renal impairment, and dose reductions are recommended for those with mildtomoderate levels of renal impairment.
Topiramate, an anticonvulsant, is hypothesized to have beneficial effects on drinking by facilitating functioning of the neurotransmitter γaminobutyric acid (GABA) and antagonizing gluta mate activity.Two placebocontrolled trials (Johnson et al. 2003(Johnson et al. , 2008)), including a multisite study, have demonstrated the efficacy of topiramate in veryheavydrinking alcohol dependent patients who were not required to be abstinent prior to starting treatment.In these trials, therapists used brief behavioral compliance enhancement therapy to enhance medication adherence and provide support for patients who worked on their personal goals for their drink ing.Patients also reduced cigarette smoking, which suggests a potential side benefit of using topiramate to treat alcoholdependent smokers (Johnson et al. 2005).
Topiramate requires very gradual dose escalation.The most common adverse events include cognitive dys function, abnormal sensations (e.g., numbness, tingling), and anorexia and taste abnormalities.Additional rarer serious adverse events have been identified, such as metabolic acidosis, acute myopia, and secondary narrow angle glaucoma.The optimal dose for alcohol dependence has yet to be established and may be lower than that the target dose of 300 mg per day tested in prior research.

New Medications on the Horizon
Currently available pharmacotherapies only have modest effects, which has spurred efforts to identify treatment responders, new medications, treatment combinations, and methods to enhance adherence.As reviewed by Krishnan Sarin and colleagues (2008), several other medications show some clinical evidence of efficacy.
Numerous studies have tested selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (approved for depression), often with disappointing results including countertherapeutic effects among patients with earlyonset alcoholism.However, studies show that these medications (e.g., sertra line) may be efficacious among indi viduals with lateronset alcoholism (Kranzler et al. 1996;Pettinati et al. 2000) or in combination with naltrex one for patients with major depression (Pettinati et al. 2010).In contrast, ondansetron (a selective serotonin3 [5HT 3 ] antagonist approved for nau sea) shows some efficacy for reducing heavy drinking among patients with earlyonset or TypeB alcoholism (Kranzler et al. 2003;Johnson et al. 2000).
Medications targeting GABA and glutamate systems show promise as treatments for acute and protracted alcohol withdrawal and for relapse prevention.Treatment with baclofen (a GABA b receptor agonist [i.e., it binds with the GABA b receptor] used for muscle spasticity) has been found to reduce symptoms of alcohol with drawal, and a placebocontrolled study of 84 alcoholdependent patients with cirrhosis yielded promising results (Addolorato et al. 2007).However, a recent placebocontrolled study in 121 patients did not find an advan tage of baclofen over placebo on mea sures of drinking, although baclofen was associated with reduced anxiety (Garbutt et al. 2010).Additional efficacy studies will need to address whether individuals with more severe dependence or greater anxiety may benefit from this medication.Gabapentin, an anticonvulsant, also shows promise for alcohol withdrawal and for improving drinking outcomes in early treatment among individuals with high alcoholwithdrawal symp toms (Anton et al. 2009) or individuals with comorbid insomnia (Brower et al. 2008).
Given the role of dopamine in the maintenance of alcohol dependence, drugs that have direct effects on dopamine through either partial ago nism (e.g., aripiprazole) or through antagonist effects (e.g., olanzapine, quetiapine) have been investigated as candidates for alcoholism treat ment.A multisite study did not find an overall advantage of the atypical antipsychotic aripiprazole over placebo on the primary outcomes, although some secondary outcomes suggested that studies at lower doses would be worthwhile (Anton et al. 2008a).A smaller, singlesite, placebocontrolled study did not show a benefit of olan zapine, and, although not statistically significant, discontinuation of treatment was higher in the group receiving active medication compared to the group receiving placebo.The anti psychotics all have important adverse events that may limit the potential of these agents for treating alcohol dependence.
There has been considerable enthu siasm about the potential of rimona bant, a cannabinoid receptor 1 antagonist, based on preclinical research showing that it reduced alcohol drinking.However, psychiatric adverse events noted in obese patients, a negative human alcohol selfadministration study (George et al. 2009), and a negative clinical trial in individuals with alcohol dependence (Soyka et al. 2008) have ruled out this particular agent for the treatment of alcohol dependence.
Many alcoholdependent individuals also smoke cigarettes, and researchers have investigated the potential role of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) system as a factor in both addictive behaviors (for a review, see Chatterjee and Bartlett 2010).Nicotinic compounds, including agonists, partial agonists, and antagonists, currently are under investigation for the treatment of alcoholism.Human laboratory studies have shown that mecamylamine, a nonselective nAChR antagonist approved for hypertension, can reduce alcohol preference and the stimulating effects of alcohol in healthy study par ticipants (Blomqvist et al. 2002;Chi et al. 2003;Young et al. 2005).Laboratory studies also have shown that vareni cline, a partial agonist approved for smoking cessation, can reduce craving and drinking in smokers who drink heavily (McKee et al. 2009).A pre liminary study among smokers receiving varenicline for smoking cessation found that it significantly reduced heavy drinking (compared with a placebo) during an extended pretreatment period (Fucito et al. in press).Studies are ongoing to evaluate the efficacy of these two compounds in clinical trials of alcoholdependent patients.
Researchers also are studying agents that may address the relationship between stress and alcohol consumption.Prazosin, an α1 adrenergic antagonist that is effective in treating posttrau matic stress disorder (PTSD), has shown preliminary efficacy in a small pilot study with 24 alcoholdependent patients without PTSD (Simpson et al. 2009).Other targets for new treatments are receptors for stress related neuropeptides, including corticotrophin releasing factor (CRF), neuropeptide Y (NPY), substance P, nociceptin (George et al. 2008;Heilig and Egli 2006), and inhibitors of ALDH2 (Overstreet et al. 2009).

Optimizing Outcomes by Patient-Treatment Matching
Research is being done in an attempt to identify predictors of patient response to FDA-approved treatments.In a secondary analysis of a U.S. acam prosate trial, patients with a strong commitment to abstinence benefited from acamprosate (Mason et al. 2006).However, several hypothesized predic tors of acamprosate response, including high physiological dependence, late ageofonset, and serious anxiety symp toms, did not predict differential response in a pooled analysis of data from seven placebocontrolled trials.A secondary analysis of baseline trajec tories of drinking in the Combining Medications and Behavioral Interventions for Alcoholism Study (COMBINE), the largest study of pharmacotherapy to date, found that individuals who achieved 14 or more days of abstinence may not be good candidates for acamprosate whereas those who were frequent drinkers but did not attain extended abstinence may benefit (Ralitza et al. in press).With regard to naltrexone, several studies, but not all, have suggested that family history of alcoholism (Krishnan Sarin et al. 2007;Monterosso et al. 2001;Rohsenow et al. 2007) and a variant of the opioid receptor, µ1 (OPRM1) may predict differential benefit (Anton et al. 2008b;Oslin et al. 2003).In the COMBINE study, people with "Type A" alcohol dependence (i.e., fewer comorbid psychiatric and substance abuse disorders) responded well to naltrex one (Bogenschutz et al. 2009).Because primary care providers may feel more comfortable managing less complicated patients, this is an encour aging finding.In the end, the promise of personalized medicine will depend on the identification of reliable pre dictors of differential treatment response.

Optimizing Outcomes by Increasing Adherence
Poor adherence to prescribed medica tions can limit a treatment's effectiveness.As a result, research has investigated predictors of adherence and methods for enhancing adherence.One of the best predictors of future behavior is past behavior.In the case of medication compliance, selfreported problems with adherence characterized as pur poseful nonadherence (e.g., stopping medication early due to either feeling better or worse) predict medication compliance and treatment outcome (Toll et al. 2007)

Medication Use for Nondependent Hazardous Drinkers
Currently, research has evaluated alcoholism medications primarily in alcoholdependent populations.Many individuals, however, drink at harmful levels but do not meet the criteria for dependence and may ben efit from medications to augment counseling approaches used with this subgroup of drinkers.

Young Adults
Because young adults are less interested in quitting drinking than in reducing their drinking, interventions to help them moderate their alcohol con sumption may be particularly useful (Epler et al. 2009) (Kranzler et al. 2009).A preliminary openlabel study of naltrexone and BASICS in young adults suggests that this approach is associated with reductions in heavy drinking and alcoholrelated consequences (Leeman et al. 2008).

Reducing Drinking
Regardless of age, many individuals with alcohol dependence, particularly those with less severe problems, would prefer to reduce their drinking rather than seek total abstinence, and low severity of alcohol dependence is one of the characteristics that predicts recovery from alcohol problems, as evidenced by moderate drinking (Humphreys et al. 1995).As a result, medications that reliably reduce the risk of heavy drinking would likely enhance treatment seeking, especially among individuals with less severe problems.In this regard, topiramate and naltrexone show potential for a subset of patients.However, the field needs to identify which patients achieve and maintain nonhazardous drinking with these medications and better medications that have this effect for a broad spectrum of patients.

Medication Use in the Treatment of Unhealthy Alcohol Use in Primary Care Settings
The rapid progress in the development of medications to treat alcohol dependence, although impressive, has resulted in a relatively slow adap tation of these new treatments.In 2007, the percentage of Veterans Administration patients with alcohol use disorders who received pharma cotherapy was 3 percent (Harris et al. 2010).Among patients seen in the past year in 128 Veterans Health Administration facilities, the rates ranged from 0 to 20.5 percent among those who received specialty care and from 0 to 4.3 percent among those who did not receive specialty care.A number of obstacles have hindered medication use in alcohol dependence treatment programs, including lack of knowledge and availability of medical staff who can prescribe.However, researchers have identified the follow ing factors associated with the adop tion of medication use: organizational characteristics, such as accreditation; the presence of staff physicians; and the availability of detoxification (see the sidebar by LaPaglia on p. 305).
Primary care providers are well suited to address a wide variety of behavioral problems in their patients and routinely manage chronic diseases with a combination of counseling and medication management.Using primary care-based prevention strategies to address behaviors such as overeating and smoking, practitioners already routinely screen for conditions such as high cholesterol, hypertension, and cancer and treat a full range of chronic conditions such as diabetes and asthma.Similar clinical management strategies for unhealthy alcohol use and alcohol use disorders have been developed.However, despite convincing data sup porting the value of evidencebased screening techniques, brief interven tions, and medication approaches, primary care settings rarely use these tools (D'Amico et al. 2005).In an effort to address this situation, the Institute of Medicine (2005) strongly endorsed the notion that primary care providers should have a greatly enhanced role in identifying and managing substance use problems in their patients as part of a strategy to improve access to care for individuals with substance use disorders.
With regard to alcohol, a single question about how often the patient exceeds the daily maximum drinking limits (i.e., more than four drinks for men and more than three drinks for women) in the prior year can be effec tively used to screen for unhealthy alcohol use (Willenbring et al. 2009).The NIAAA clinician's guide, Helping Patients Who Drink Too Much, pro vides practical advice about how to

Challenges and Solutions of Adding Medications
Treatment to Specialty Addiction Treatment Programs: A Review With Suggestions Donna LaPaglia, Psy.D.

S
low diffusion of evidencebased innovations is a common occurrence in health care.Rogers (2003) documented the lag that exists between proven scientific benefits and their adoption into formal practice.This gap is very pronounced in addictions treatment, despite documented evidence of therapies that show promise in treating substance use disorders (Lamb et al. 1998;McGovern et al. 2004;Sorenson and Midkiff 2002).This widely acknowledged gap occurs for psychotherapeutic interventions as well as established pharmacotherapies.
A multitude of factors are thought to influence the substance abuse treatment community's ability and/or willingness to incorporate these practices into routine care.This sidebar focuses specifically on the adoption of medicationbased approaches for the treatment of alcohol dependence, describes the historical context and the environmental milieu of current addictions treatment, and makes recommendations for the suc cessful implementation of medications use in addiction treatment programs.
Data Medicationassisted treatment accounts for a small percentage of ongoing substance abuse treatment in this country.With a vast majority of the substance using population not reaping the benefits of addiction medications, it is necessary to examine the historical beginnings of addictions treatment to inform adoption recommendations.
Because of social stigma, addictions treatment grew in isolation from mainstream medical care (Guydish 2003; White 1998), with recovering peers ministering to each other out of necessity.The system of care that evolved carried with it a "personal" focus with peer teachings spread by word of mouth.These teachings and the surrounding attitudes and belief systems emphasize selfreliance and the belief that healing can take place solely within the community of addicted people and that no medical intervention is necessary.Addiction treatment programs sprang forth from Alcoholics Anonymous (Alcoholics Anonymous 1976) and other stepbased movements.The resulting system of care possesses, at its core, a philosophical belief that total abstinence is gained not through the use of medication to treat alcohol dependence but instead through blood, sweat, and personal tears working through the 12 steps.
The most recent Federal data indicate that non medical personnel, many of whom possess personal 12step recovery histories, deliver the majority of alcoholism treatment in this country in specialty care settings.These treatment programs differ widely in organizational structure, source of payment, services offered, leadership characteristics, staff credentials, presence of medical personnel, program size, and patient characteristics.
Data from these specialty care settings indicate that adoption of medication for the treatment of alcohol disorders is uncommon in both the public and private sector (Ducharme et al. 2006).An examination of public reimbursement as reported by the National Conference of State Legislatures (2008) indicates that Medicaid coverage of substance abuse medications is not common among States and that it is an option not a requirement (Gelber 2008).
Accordingly, factors that may positively influence the adoption of medication use should target State regulatory structures, availability of medical staff, community linkages, and curricula of alcohol and drug training programs as well as graduate psychology pro grams.Focus on the following areas may increase a program's readiness for the adoption of medication use: DONNA LAPAGLIA, PSY.D., is an assistant professor of psychiatry at the Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
• Increase State agencies' understanding of the benefits related to medicationassisted therapies for addiction in an effort to increase acceptance for public funding.
• State licensing requirements for programs could be amended to require greater availability of medical staff and credentialed counselors, given that the presence of medical personnel is key to the adoption of medication use, as is the presence of counselors with higher educational attainment (i.e., Masters level or higher) (Knudsen et al. 2005).
• Formal linkages between specialty treatment providers and primary care physicians could allow for the flow of information, expertise (clinical and medical), and support, thus enhancing the experiential base of both providers.
• Graduate psychology programs, addiction psychiatry fellowships, and drug and alcohol programs should include evidencebased treatments in curriculum and internship training opportunities.Currently, degree programs often neglect evidencebased treat ments, may not offer addictions course work, and may not offer opportunities for students to develop competence in any empirically validated treatments, psychosocial or pharmacotherapeutic (Crits Christoph et al. 1995;Miller and Brown 1997).
• Most substance abuse counselors indicate that they do not use scientific journals to inform practice (Miller 1987b;Sobell 1996).As a result, dissemination of information about medications to program members, from directors to line staff, should occur through publications in trade journals and newsletters, con tinuing education course work, professional meetings, and facetoface interaction (workshops).For the education to be effective it must be written or trans lated into everyday language using actual case exam ples of programs successfully adopting medications.This approach is personal and positive and can be quite powerful for substance abuse counselors with recovery histories.
• With the accumulating evidence base for motivational enhancement strategies (Carroll et al. 2006) and more widespread experience with these interventions, medication adoption no longer challenges program treatment philosophy.Instead, it may be viewed as supporting clients who are motivated to achieve and maintain continued abstinence.
• Ongoing consultation, supervision, and feedback are useful for programs adopting and maintaining the practice of treating alcohol disorders with medication.
Agencies that have decided to utilize medications for the treatment of alcohol disorders should consider the following suggestions for successful implementation and maintenance: • Programs can offer incentives for attendance at training sessions (e.g., time off with pay), food and prizes at the training event, bonuses, or promotions contingent on achieving a level of competence with the use of the pharmacotherapy (Carise et al. 2002).
• Programs should develop plans for incorporating medications into their existing practice.Process improvement methods, such as the NIATx Way (Langley et al. 1996), provide a potential tool for doing this.Process improvements allow agencies to make major changes by tackling one small project in a short amount of time (2 to 4week turnaround).The steps for setting up a change project (with examples for addressing use of pharmacotherapy) are as follows: (1) Gather data for the indicator you wish to change (e.g., number of alcoholdependent clients within your program currently treated with medication); (2) determine the target population (e.g., alcohol dependent clients with no prior medication attempts and prior psychosocial treatment failures); (3) establish a clear aim (e.g., greater engagement in treatment in the targeted population); (4) select a change leader (i.e., a positive, energized person who has the ability to leverage and or interact with all levels of the organization); and (5) create a team (including employees from all levels of the organiza tion) responsible for developing and implementing the change.As one example, the team might decide to implement a tickler reminding the physician to discuss medications as part of the treatment plan review.At the end of the change period, the team analyzes the data and makes decisions (plan, do, study, act) based on the findings.This could include continuing the use of medication for clients with prior treatment failure or expanding the client base by including alcoholdependent clients new to substance abuse treatment.The positive client results motivate the team to continue in this direction.Using this model creates natural "buy in;" employees are less likely to feel that incorporating medication adoption is a managementonly decision because they had a hand in designing the program change.
Medications for Unhealthy Alcohol Use follow up with individuals who screen positively for excessive drinking (NIAAA 2009).The guide recommends that clinicians evaluate the potential use of alcoholism medications as a treatment component for patients who screen positively for excessive drinking.

Studies of Medication Use in Primary Care
Evidence supporting the potential use of alcoholism medications in primary care settings derives from studies con ducted in such settings and studies that compared specialty care with primary care models of counseling.These studies provide clues to the nature and amount of behavioral counseling needed to accompany pharmacotherapy.Some studies address both of these questions (or do not separate the questions), whereas others address one or the other.Most studies have not enrolled primary care patients but have evaluated primary care models of treatment provided by medical providers who are not alcoholism specialists in research settings.
In an initial study examining the effectiveness of naltrexone in combi nation with a primary care model of care, 197 alcoholdependent participants were treated with naltrexone for 10 weeks in combination with cognitivebehavioral therapy (CBT) provided by an alcoholism specialist or in com bination with primary care manage ment (PCM) provided by a primary care practitioner (O'Malley et al. 2003).Treatment response was similar at the end of 10 weeks, with 84.1 percent (74 of 88) of the PCM patients and 86.5 percent (77 of 89) of the CBT patients avoiding persistent heavy drinking.Among those who responded to a primary care model, continued treatment with naltrexone for 6 months significantly helped sustain gains.Among those receiving CBT, mainte nance of response remained relatively high and continued naltrexone did not improve this outcome significantly over placebo.
The COMBINE Study (Anton et al. 2006) tested the efficacy of medi cations for alcoholism in the context of a medical management model of counseling in contrast to an approach in which patients received medical management and specialist counseling.In this study, eight groups of recently alcoholabstinent individuals with diagnoses of primary alcohol dependence based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition received medical management with 16 weeks of naltrexone (100 mg per day) or acamprosate (3 g per day), both naltrexone and acamprosate, and/or both placebos, with or without a combined behavioral intervention (CBI).A ninth group received CBI only (no pills).
The medical management interven tion consisted of up to nine sessions over 16 weeks with a health care professional (e.g., a nurse, physician's associate, nurse practitioner, or physi cian).Following an initial 45minute interview, subsequent appointments were approximately 15 minutes long.The approach included monitoring of drinking, support and encourage ment, establishing a plan for medication adherence, monitoring and problem solving adherence issues, and advice to attend support groups (e.g., Alcoholics Anonymous).
The results indicated that patients who received naltrexone plus medical management, CBI plus medical man agement and placebos, or naltrexone and CBI plus medical management had higher percentages of days absti nent (80.6, 79.2, and 77.1 percent, respectively) than those receiving placebos and medical management only (75.1 percent).Naltrexone also reduced the risk of having a heavy drinking day, but this effect was most evident in those receiving medical management but not CBI.Acamprosate showed no significant effect on drink ing versus placebo, either by itself or with any combination of naltrexone, CBI, or both.These results suggest that health care providers could use a primary care model of counseling with pharmacotherapy to improve treatment outcomes.
Consistent with the findings in COMBINE, O'Malley and colleagues (2007) demonstrated that a 50mg daily naltrexone regimen in combina tion with medical management also was effective in a rural Alaskan envi ronment among alcoholdependent individuals (primarily Alaska natives).Naltrexone significantly improved abstinence rates and decreased rates of alcoholrelated consequences over the course of the 16week treatment.Given that access to specialty care often is limited in rural communities, the potential of incorporating phar macotherapy into primary care practice could help reduce important health disparities resulting from limited access to treatment.
Oslin and colleagues ( 2008) com pleted the only study that has evalu ated the intensity of interventions that primary care providers might use.In this 24week study, participants received naltrexone or placebo and one of three psychosocial interventions.All participants attended nine brief medication visits with a physician for safety monitoring, brief review of drinking, and dispensing of medica tions.One group only received these doctor visits.A second group received up to 18 additional counseling sessions with a nurse practitioner based on the BRENDA model (Volpicelli et al. 1997), which includes aspects of motivational counseling and specifically focuses on adherence to treatment, progress made toward reducing alcohol consumption, problemsolving, and selfchange strategies.The third group received up to 18 individual CBT sessions with a clinical psychologist or social worker.
The results favored CBT compared with the two other less intensive treatments.The differences between the BRENDA and the doctorsonly groups were not significantly different.The effect of naltrexone was not significant and did not vary by the type of psychosocial intervention, although the sample size was too small to detect anything other than very large interaction effects.Medication adherence was relatively low (50 per cent took medication on 80 percent of days over the 24 weeks of therapy) and may have been related to the rel atively longer duration of the study and the use of the 100mg dose.Medication adherence was associated with better outcomes, irrespective of medication condition.
Extendedrelease naltrexone appears to be well suited for use in primary care settings.Skilled medical personnel are required to administer extended release naltrexone with an intramus cular gluteal injection; many specialty programs do not have access to needed medical care providers.Moreover, the efficacy studies of extendedrelease naltrexone used BRENDA counseling, albeit the frequency of appointments may have exceeded that likely to occur in primary care.Future studies should evaluate the efficacy of onceamonth extendedrelease naltrexone with less frequent counseling and in patients recruited through primary care sites.
As reviewed by Mason and Crean (2007), the European studies of acamprosate typically enrolled partici pants who had completed inpatient detoxification and then received standard care as outpatients.The treatment outcomes, including time to first day of drinking or cumulative abstinence duration, were very similar whether patients received brief inter ventions or intensive treatments includ ing relapse prevention therapy, individual therapy, group therapy, or family therapy in addition to acamprosate (Pelc et al. 2002;Soyka et al. 2002).
One of the few medication trials actually conducted in primary care sites (KiritzeTopor et al. 2004) com pared standard care to standard care with acamprosate among 422 alcohol dependent patients recruited and treated for 1 year in general practices.Patients treated with acamprosate and standard care showed significantly greater improvement, with 64 percent reporting no alcoholrelated problems for 1 year compared with 50.2 percent of those receiving standard care alone.Although the study physicians had prior experience treating alcoholism and had participated in at least one clinical trial, the general conclusion from this study was that general practitioners could effectively use acamprosate to manage alcohol dependence.The low loss to followup of 17 percent over 1 year highlights a potential advantage of treating patients in primary care, where patients have ongoing relationships with their providers compared with specialty care programs, where dropout rates are substantially higher.
Recent studies of continuingcare interventions suggest that interventions of a year or longer and treatments that are less burdensome can promote sustained engagement and positive effects (McKay 2006).As discussed above, the use of medications by pri mary care providers may be a viable approach to providing lowintensity longerterm treatment.Patients also may be open to this approach.In a survey of medially hospitalized patients with alcohol dependence (Stewart and Connors 2007), 66 percent agreed that they would like to receive a medication that would help prevent drinking, and 32 percent were inter ested in primary care treatment.
In summary, the research literature supports the effectiveness of medications, such as naltrexone, in combination with models of care that primary care providers or medical professionals associated with specialty alcohol pro grams could use.Several published manuals (NIAAA 2009;Pettinatti et al. 2004Pettinatti et al. , 2005;;Volpicelli et al. 2001) are available that detail the specifics of these approaches.In prior research, these primary care interventions involved brief but frequent appoint ments.As discussed earlier, frequent contact is likely to enhance medication adherence and contribute to the effectiveness of medications.However, researchers have not yet established the tradeoff between decreasing the frequency of followup in conjunction with primary care counseling and the effectiveness of medication treatments for alcoholism.Even research on injectable naltrexone, a onceamonth preparation, was evaluated in con junction with 12 sessions over 6 months.As a result, additional research is required in order to guide clinical practice about the minimal frequency of counseling, but this should not prohibit the use of FDAapproved medications in these settings.

Implementing Medication Use in Primary Care Settings
In the management of both acute and chronic conditions, physicians and other medical professionals often need to consider carefully when to suggest medication treatment to individual patients.Typically, the decision to recommend medication treatment relies on a combination of an assessment of the evidence to support a particular therapy for a specific condition and clinical judgment concerning whether an individual patient is appropriate for that treat ment based on a variety of patient and diseasespecific features.Clearly, such decisions are best arrived at using a patientcentered approach involving patient education, prefer ences, and mutual decisionmaking.Even when medication therapy has a clear evidence base in a given clinical situation, patients and their providers may identify a variety of reasons why a specific therapy may or may not be used.Beyond this, research often demonstrates that there are certain patient subgroups for whom a specific therapy may or may not be particu larly effective.These subgroups may be identifiable based on clinical, demographic, genetic, or social features that all may play a major role in the decision process regarding medication use.With the availability of several FDAapproved medications, a provider may recommend a trial with a new medication should an individual patient not respond to the first medication tried.
The implementation and widespread use of medications to treat alcohol problems faces a unique set of barriers in primary care.Although primary care providers are proficient at prescrib ing a wide variety of medications, they generally are unfamiliar with medica tions for treating alcohol problems other than those used to treat alcohol withdrawal.Indeed, a growing body of research to support basic screening methods, brief interventions, and especially medication therapy has yet to have a major impact on how primary care providers care for individuals at risk for or with alcohol problems (D'Amico et al. 2005).The results of studies on how to enhance the use of screening and brief intervention, however, may inform how to promote medication treatments for alcohol problems in primary care.For example, in one study, practicebased provider education and quality improvement activities resulted in a 65 percent screening rate (compared with 24 percent in control practices) and a 51 percent counseling rate (versus 30 percent in control practices) (Rose et al. 2008).In addition, the success of strategies to implement screening and briefintervention practices in prima ry care appears to rely on a variety of complex provider and organizational characteristics (Babor et al. 2005).Understanding and addressing these characteristics may be particularly important if these medications are to gain acceptance in primary care.Finally, "marketing" strategies shown to be helpful with the implementa tion of brief intervention counseling, such as telemarketing and academic detailing (Funk et al. 2005), may be particularly useful in enhancing pri mary care physicians' use of medications for treating alcohol problems.Future research should carefully examine the effectiveness of these and other approaches to improving the extent to which primary care physicians can be prompted to use effective medica tions when appropriate to treat their patients with alcohol problems.

Summary
Identifying and treating people with alcohol use disorders remains a chal lenge.With the advent of pharma cotherapy and models of counseling appropriate for use in primary care settings as well as in specialty care, clinicians have new tools to manage the spectrum of alcohol problems across the spectrum of patients and settings.By extending the continuum of care to primary care settings, many people who do not currently receive specialty care may have increased access to treatment.In addition, pri mary care providers, by virtue of their ongoing relationships with patients may be able to provide continuing care interventions.Medication use with hazardous drinkers who may not be alcohol dependent may promote reduced drinking and likely will .

National Institutes of Health
Alcohol Alert, a quarterly bulletin published by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, describes the latest research on alcohol use disorders and treatment in a brief, easytouse format.
Forty years ago, Federal legislation placed new emphasis on solving America's alcohol problems and created the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA).Since then, NIAAA has led an increasingly effective effort to both define alcohol issues as medical in nature and to address them using evidencebased findings.This Alcohol Alert reflects on 40 years of NIAAA's research and outreach accomplishments and provides insight into the future direction of this important work.

NIAAA: 40
Forty years ago, Federal legislation placed new emphasis on solving America's alcohol problems and created the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA).Since then, NIAAA has led an increasingly effective effort to both define alcohol issues as medical in nature and to address them using evidence-based findings. 1  This Alcohol Alert reflects on 40 years of NIAAA's research and outreach accomplishments and provides insight into the future direction of this important work.

The Institute's Formation and Impact
Passage of the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment, and Rehabilitation Act of 1970-also known as the Hughes Act-created NIAAA as a high-profile agency in charge of addressing problems related to alcohol consumption.Researchers and policymakers who wrote the law were bringing to light a shift in scientific thinking about alcohol problems that had begun in the 1930s with the formation of Alcoholics Anonymous.Instead of viewing alcoholism as resulting from personal weakness, researchers and health care providers were beginning to view it as a curable public health problem.